Peer-reviewed review paper has evaluated head-to-head studies of astaxanthin from three different sources
Algae Health Sciences, a division of BGG, has announced the peer-reviewed publication of a review paper which evaluates head-to-head studies comparing astaxanthin from three different sources in animals and in-vitro.
In each case, astaxanthin from the algal species Haematococcus pluvialis proved significantly more efficacious and biologically active than either synthetic astaxanthin or astaxanthin from the genetically-mutated yeast called Phaffia.
Six animal studies tested the different forms for a variety of health benefits and found the algal-based form performed significantly better for a variety of health benefits such as increasing lifespan; treating skin cancer; preventing the formation of gastric ulcers; improving resistance to stress; improving exercise endurance; decreasing reactive oxygen species (ROS); and augmenting enzyme levels. Furthermore, two antioxidant studies found that algal astaxanthin has 14x to 90x greater antioxidant activity than aynthetic astaxanthin.
"In addition to these eight studies demonstrating superior efficacy and activity for algal astaxanthin, it's important to understand that there are absolutely no human clinical trials we found demonstrating any health benefit or even safety for the alternative astaxanthin forms," said Shawn Talbott, President of EQQIL (a clinical research organisation) who was an author of the review paper.
"Until clinical trials are published on synthetic Astaxanthin and astaxanthin from Phaffia yeast showing efficacy and long-term human safety studies are conducted, our conclusion is that consumers should ensure that they're supplementing with algal-based astaxanthin," Talbott added. "Algal astaxanthin has over 100 clinical trials showing efficacy, numerous human safety studies, and twenty years of consumer use in the market."
"The consistency of the results of these eight different studies is noteworthy in that the algal form of astaxanthin always came out on top," added Bob Capelli, lead author of the review paper. "In most of the studies, the differences in results between the three forms were quite striking."